![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
It's recently come to my notice that the manner in which 'native races' are portrayed on Stargate is, if not racist, then certainly strongly jingoistic.
This is going to focus on the broader perception of races and how they get portrayed in the show - mostly Atlantis, although SG-1 will be in there, too.
Basically, it seems that the native races of Pegasus are either technologically inept (primitive) or 'the bad guys'.
We have societies like the Athosians, who are still in the 'hunter-gatherer' stage of civilisation, who are on the side of the Atlantis expedition but primitive; and at the other end of the scale, we have societies like the Gennii, who are close to the 'information revolution' stage of civilisation, but are at best wary allies, and at worst, frank enemies.
Then there are the Satedans, who must have had a pretty technologically advanced civilisation before the Wraith took them out - Ronon's weaponry speaks to that - but who don't even get a mention on the 'we could pick over their bones and see if they developed something we haven't' scale. Hell, I don't think anyone's mentioned even asking Ronon if they can take apart his weapons to see how they tick.
Granted, Ronon's likely to look at them and say flatly, 'No,' but the man came from a world that nearly fought back against the Wraith! Just because he doesn't speak much doesn't mean he's a savage. He's probably no more of a savage than any man who comes home from his work, sits down in his lounge chair and can't be prevailed on for more than a grunt or a dozen before dinner, let alone bed.
The episode that's supposed to deal with Ronon's background will be interesting: if only because it took them about 30 episodes to even revisit Teyla's background with the Athosians, and they were relegated to a side plot, a funeral, and some very lovely singing by Rachel Luttrell that had almost no relevance to the plot.
The race issue is another thing that's slowly been coming upon me.
SG1 - Teal'c is the 'native guide' - black, primitive people.
SGA - Teyla is the 'native guide' - mixed race, primitive people.
SGA - Aiden is the 'yes, man' - black
SGA - Ronon is the 'grunt and muscle' - with a polynesian background (? I think - but even if not, the point with Teal'c, Teyla and Aiden still stands)
You know, I'm waiting for the episode where they come across an Asiatic civilisation that's either run like the Japanese samurai or full of Asian crime gangs.
It's a bit worrying, not that there are characters who are relegated to the background and they're non-white(other characters are background, too: Janet, Carson, Zelenka, etc), but that the non-white characters seem to be inevitably relegated to the background in the Stargate universe.
To some degree, I'm sure it's symptomatic of TV shows: white people want to watch white people. Still, I find it disturbing that the nominated 'leaders' of the primitive peoples - and therefore their representatives - are almost always non-white. (Plus, the leaders of the 'white people with civilisation' are evil if their cultures aren't.)
Finally, I'm curious about the fact that the 'jumper driver seat is on the left. Not all civilisations drive on the right-hand side of the road. It's like the assumption that people in the Northern Hemisphere have that birds fly south for the winter, and that things get warmer the further south you go.
Atlantis does not necessarily have to be in the northern hemisphere of its planet. I mean, it very well may be - I haven't studied the shots of the planet all that well. But, coming from the other half of the planet (where Christmas is in summer and we build our houses facing north for the best sun) I think it would be cool to have all the people from up north completely turned around by the fact that the sun's path lies northwards and not south, while the people from the southern hemisphere are all "what are you guys going on about?" While secretly snickering behind their hands.
The idea of a culture that influenced Earth (instead of American-Earth influencing it) is intriguing: but it would have been nice to see some of the standards turned upside down - perceptions changed and rearranged - to make people think.
And if you can sandwich some perception adjustment in between entertainment, I don't think that's entirely a bad thing.
This is going to focus on the broader perception of races and how they get portrayed in the show - mostly Atlantis, although SG-1 will be in there, too.
Basically, it seems that the native races of Pegasus are either technologically inept (primitive) or 'the bad guys'.
We have societies like the Athosians, who are still in the 'hunter-gatherer' stage of civilisation, who are on the side of the Atlantis expedition but primitive; and at the other end of the scale, we have societies like the Gennii, who are close to the 'information revolution' stage of civilisation, but are at best wary allies, and at worst, frank enemies.
Then there are the Satedans, who must have had a pretty technologically advanced civilisation before the Wraith took them out - Ronon's weaponry speaks to that - but who don't even get a mention on the 'we could pick over their bones and see if they developed something we haven't' scale. Hell, I don't think anyone's mentioned even asking Ronon if they can take apart his weapons to see how they tick.
Granted, Ronon's likely to look at them and say flatly, 'No,' but the man came from a world that nearly fought back against the Wraith! Just because he doesn't speak much doesn't mean he's a savage. He's probably no more of a savage than any man who comes home from his work, sits down in his lounge chair and can't be prevailed on for more than a grunt or a dozen before dinner, let alone bed.
The episode that's supposed to deal with Ronon's background will be interesting: if only because it took them about 30 episodes to even revisit Teyla's background with the Athosians, and they were relegated to a side plot, a funeral, and some very lovely singing by Rachel Luttrell that had almost no relevance to the plot.
The race issue is another thing that's slowly been coming upon me.
SG1 - Teal'c is the 'native guide' - black, primitive people.
SGA - Teyla is the 'native guide' - mixed race, primitive people.
SGA - Aiden is the 'yes, man' - black
SGA - Ronon is the 'grunt and muscle' - with a polynesian background (? I think - but even if not, the point with Teal'c, Teyla and Aiden still stands)
You know, I'm waiting for the episode where they come across an Asiatic civilisation that's either run like the Japanese samurai or full of Asian crime gangs.
It's a bit worrying, not that there are characters who are relegated to the background and they're non-white(other characters are background, too: Janet, Carson, Zelenka, etc), but that the non-white characters seem to be inevitably relegated to the background in the Stargate universe.
To some degree, I'm sure it's symptomatic of TV shows: white people want to watch white people. Still, I find it disturbing that the nominated 'leaders' of the primitive peoples - and therefore their representatives - are almost always non-white. (Plus, the leaders of the 'white people with civilisation' are evil if their cultures aren't.)
Finally, I'm curious about the fact that the 'jumper driver seat is on the left. Not all civilisations drive on the right-hand side of the road. It's like the assumption that people in the Northern Hemisphere have that birds fly south for the winter, and that things get warmer the further south you go.
Atlantis does not necessarily have to be in the northern hemisphere of its planet. I mean, it very well may be - I haven't studied the shots of the planet all that well. But, coming from the other half of the planet (where Christmas is in summer and we build our houses facing north for the best sun) I think it would be cool to have all the people from up north completely turned around by the fact that the sun's path lies northwards and not south, while the people from the southern hemisphere are all "what are you guys going on about?" While secretly snickering behind their hands.
The idea of a culture that influenced Earth (instead of American-Earth influencing it) is intriguing: but it would have been nice to see some of the standards turned upside down - perceptions changed and rearranged - to make people think.
And if you can sandwich some perception adjustment in between entertainment, I don't think that's entirely a bad thing.
no subject
I live in the south and if I, as a middle class white woman, called someone colored I would get spit on or worse. You may want to dismiss something as PC, but I know damn well there are words I'm not allowed to use, and yes, they include calling people of color "colored" or calling any black man over the age of 12 "boy".
no subject
So, mostly no, but kinda yes *g*.
Huh, yeah, boy... I can see where'd that'd come from. We don't have that over here, though boys tend to stop being boys around 14, and from then till around 18 it's boy/teenager hybrid... thing. Doesn't change cause of a person's race.
But, I can see how it'd be there.
But, nope, I'm a southerner! In, ah, another country.
no subject
Unfortunately on the internet there aren't restrictions on where people read things, so while it might be just fine where you are or where the author is, it's still likely to cause problems if read by people in my part of the world.
As Melyanna pointed out, "colored" brings up mental images here of seperate drinking fountains and segregation. My grandfather, when he was still alive, was an upper class southern gentlemen of a different generation and he used colored in polite conversation, and negro and nigger in less polite conversation. He meant the same thing both times, and everyone around him knew it.
no subject
I mean, I could call some one 'my lover' and they'd get completely the wrong impression. In the city where I am, and grew up, it's basically the same as 'my man/mate/ect'. Also, no one would know what Gurt Lush means but...
So yeah, it's a problem. I'm sure there's still some here who don't really think of coloured as a real racist word, as a kinda 'almost there but not quite' thing, like damn and bloody are an almost-but-not-quite swear words. Because it came from your side of the pond.
And the generational gap... you get that here too. Some people's grandparents still make racist remarks, and think nothing much of them, because it was just normal in their day. Course, it doesn't inspire as much tension here as it does over there.
You'd think after the London bombings we'd all be all tense and racial tensions would be increadibly high but... nope. We're imune. We have tea. A few protest rallies. So, we're still not all that weary about all the subtleties of what is racist and what isn't as it is over there.
I just hope that in a few more generations it'll calm down there some.